Advertisement

The Critical Model Parameter: LGD

  • Elisa Alghisi Manganello
  • Valentina Leucari
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Banking and Financial Institutions book series (SBFI)

Abstract

Chapter 5 discusses the definition, relevance, and application of loss given default (LGD) to credit risk management, as well as possible estimation approaches. LGD is one of the main parameters, along with probability of default (PD) and exposure at default (EAD), of estimations for both the Basel II regulation and economic capital reporting purposes. LGD estimates are also crucial for the determination of impairment allowances according to the International Accounting Standards (IAS 39) framework. However, LGD’s importance should not be restricted to compliance requirements only, but should also be extended to business’ best practice in the measurement and optimization of collection and recovery processes. In fact, starting with credit origination, the correct estimation of a financial institution’s capability in recovery actions supports proper acceptance policies in terms of risk appetite and prices based on the risk profile. In such a context, severity models applied to open-default cases can suggest appropriate collection and recovery strategies that can lead to corrective actions on current criteria and the fine tuning of costs and resources.

Keywords

Development Factor International Account Standard Banking Supervision Basel Committee Loss Give Default 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision BCBS, “Guidance on Paragraph 468 of the Framework document”, Bank for International Settlements (2005a).Google Scholar
  2. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, “Studies on the validation of internal rating systems”, BIS working paper, n.14, (2005b).Google Scholar
  3. T. Verdonck, G. Brys, and M. Van Wouwe A Robustification of the Chain-Ladder Method, (North American Actuarial Journal, vol.13, n. 2, pages 280–298, 2007).Google Scholar

Bibliography

  1. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) Basel II, “International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards: a Revised Framework”, Bank of International Settlements, http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs107.htm/publ/bcbs107.htm (2004)Google Scholar
  2. Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS), “Guidelines on the implementation, validation and assessment of Advanced Measurement (AMA) and Internal Ratings-Based (IRB) Approaches”. http://www.c-ebs.org/pdfs/CP10rev.pdf/pdfs/CP10rev.pdf (2005)Google Scholar
  3. E. Altman, B. Brady, A. Resti and A. Sironi, “The link between default and recovery rates: Theory, empirical evidence and implications”, Journal of Business, Vol. 78, No. 6 (2005) 2203–2228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. L. Gibilaro and G. Mattarocci, “The selection of the discount rate in estimating the Loss Given Default”, Global Journal of Business Research, vol. 1, issue 2, (2007), 15–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elisa Alghisi Manganello and Valentina Leucari 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Alghisi Manganello
  • Valentina Leucari

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations